Tom Kazansky

There are online keypress-tests like: https://keyboardtestt.com/ where you can see whether a /which key is pressed. Maybe that helps?

Thanks.

Could you please elaborate this?

This. And IIRC draging mouse from left to right adjusts it quicker than up/down.

Bei mir ging's gerade. Ich muss dafür aber auf das kleine Platzhalter-Icon drücken, das erscheint nachdem man den Link gedrückt hat. Ist bei vielen Bildern in den Foren so bei mir. edit: It was just fine for me. But I have to press the small placeholder icon that appears after pressing the link...

I wonder how big the difference would have been at 4k or VR with MSAA4. I will wait for those tests with DCS.

It does not need to freeze for all-time. I just wish for a matching groth between hardware and software. But I know myself that this is just naive. Because developers will always try to get the best 2D quality possible. So VR will always be suffering. I just hope for a giant leap for VR users with multithreading, Vulkan ( DLSS3, 2022-CPUs...). Ok I'm still in naive mode, for the next "12K" VR headsets will shredder all of those efforts to similar performance. Hope I'm wrong. edit: I want to add that it is not easy at all to get all if that matched. Developers are deciding today what we'll get in 3 years and more.

I said you don"t have to deal with most of the mentioned. Not all. Timeline will still be a problem. I agree. I guess there could be a filter for timelines and with growing numbers of maps for certain times the world will get better and better. I don't know much about the maximum combat radius of WW2 aircraft tho. That beeing said, it is already possible to fly a Hornet over WW2 maps in DCS, so it is already in the hands of users/mission creators to follow the rules of time or not to follow.

Thanks for sharing this review. It seems I never felt closer to a real AH-64 driver than as I read this: "When I first tried this model, I found it almost impossible to fly. It rolled over almost immediately shredding the rotor blades."

What I heard, is that ED's world is planned (only) to connect high fidelity maps by a low fidelity area. That would allow many new possibilities without having to deal with most of the problems mentioned above. But... everything is subject to change I guess.

Agreed again. What it makes so urgent for me with DCS is, I have no other games where I feel that my PC should be 2-4 times faster (in VR) than it is. And 4000 EUR/$ Hardware can't do what I need. Without DCS (in VR) I wouldn't even know about frametimes for CPUs and GPUs. (btw I hope ED does not use the performance gain of multithreading and Vulkan to fill it up with many new performance killing fancy stuff, but that's another story...)

There are not many threads where all posts have one thing in common. Here, we all agree that we need multithreading in DCS. So does ED. It seems to me that it is all about patience. I hope ED will soon have more news to share.

This. It even scares me when I see how much money is spent and earned with LOL or FN skins, thus I appreciate every single day that there are people at ED and partners, dedicated to their dream which is coincidently matching mine. So I'm eager to get news on multithreading as soon as ED has something to share. (Just to get back to topic.)

but here lies the rabbit in the pepper (like we Germans say ), it is only DCS that puts problems to my hardware, even in VR. I (hope I) would not need a "science fiction system", as soon as the DCS engine is up to date. What it will be some day. the lack of those for me is getting more and more a reason not to buy demanding modules (yet!). (Don't worry ED, I'll still buy a lot of them anyways, but just because of hope.) But I agree, it's a lot just semantics and we don't disagree in general. I just want to make it clear, that the bread would not be sold without a competitive oven

I still disagree. Apart from the point that I don't get why you reduce my statement just to Vulkan, although I said "..and above all multicore could be the main reasons for further income", I for one have already problems with buying new maps and modules, because I exclusively play DCS in VR, and with all those more and more demanding products, my fun using DCS in VR gets more and more reduced. (And it is not that I couldn't affort modern hardware, there is just none that does the job like multicore would do.) Maybe not all people buy because of APIs but all of us know what feels better as soon as we use it. So my statement is: without Vulkan and above all without multicore DCS would get a hard time with selling anything (to people like me) as soon, as new contenders come up. And I say this havy hartedly as a DCS fan boy. And I repeat: I bet ED knows that better than we do. So I'm not too much concerned about the future of DCS.

I'm not sure I got the point of this, but for me the most fun is produced by an afterburner that looks as close to the real thing as it could.

I disagree. In the future with upcoming new simulation projects, Vulkan and above all multicore could be the main reasons for further income. But: ED do not need us to tell them. They don't need to be pushed by the community to walk that path (anymore) imho. I bet they want this future proof (VR-)performance at least as much as we do.

Und im Oktober kommt die 13. Gen Intel CPU, wo man noch zwischen DDR4 und DDR5 wählen kann. Danach weiß man wieder für ein knappes Jahr was für einen die bessere Wahl ist

+1 (haven't got words yet)

Weil it seems odd anyways that a topic which asks for more options gets to a discussion about whether existing options should be terminated.

Beeing a member of this community for years, I have learned that there is an immense amount of different opinions how DCS should be. If DCS were just exactly like one single of them and not more it would lose a lot of users. So, options make a wider and bigger group of users. That beeing said, I have no problem with OP's request, although I would not join his server. Let the people decide whether they like it or not. It shouldn't be hard to disable the auto start keybinds by an option.

I understand that it might seem easier for new teams not to deal with our community. My suggestion/question was meant to avoid that ED and you moderators have to take all the complaints that imho should be addressed to those 3rd parties instead.

Wouldn't it be better to create a new subforum for every new 3rd party right at the day they officially announce modules? Look at OnReTech subforum which is a good example. No complaint-storms, no extensive discussion here about their Sinai map and the best thing: they achieved that with 2 posts and 5 replies in that subforum.

I feel you pain so I searched for a difference and I found out that since the end of 2020 combined arms has updates in almost every single stable DCS changelog. The Hawk obviously has none. That might not be enough for some/most, but CA is not dead.